Skip Navigation



The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access published online on April 28, 2006
The European Journal of Orthodontics, doi:10.1093/ejo/cji120
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
28/5/462    most recent
cji120v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Templeton, K. M.
Right arrow Articles by Sandy, J. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Templeton, K. M.
Right arrow Articles by Sandy, J. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontics Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Article

Are the Peer Assessment Rating Index and the Index of Treatment Complexity, Outcome, and Need suitable measures for orthognathic outcomes?

K. M. Templeton 1, R. Powell 1, M. B. Moore 1, A. C. Williams 2, and J. R. Sandy 3 *

1 Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK
2 King's College Hospital, London, UK
3 Bristol Dental Hospital, Bristol, UK

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. R. Sandy, E-mail: jonathan.sandy{at}bris.ac.uk


  Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine which of two occlusal indices were the most appropriate for use in the assessment of orthognathic outcome. The indices used were the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index and the Index of Treatment Complexity, Outcome, and Need (ICON). These indices were validated against the subjective assessments of treatment outcome and treatment improvement obtained from a panel of experienced orthodontic consultants.

For the subjective assessment, intraexaminer agreement for ranking treatment outcome, from patient study models (30 models), was good. Interexaminer agreement for ranking treatment outcome, in the same way, was good or moderate. Intraexaminer agreement for ranking treatment improvement (30 start and finish pairs of models) was very good or good. Interexaminer agreement for ranking treatment improvement ranged from good to fair.

All the patient study models were scored using PAR and ICON. The level of correlation between PAR and ICON scores of treatment outcome and the subjective ranking of treatment outcome was significant (P < 0.001). The level of correlation between PAR and ICON scores of treatment improvement and the subjective ranking of treatment improvement was also significant (P < 0.001). It is concluded that both PAR and ICON are suitable indices for assessing the clinical outcome of combined orthodontic treatment and orthognathic surgery.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JDRHome page
H. Kerosuo, M. Vakiparta, M. Nystrom, and K. Heikinheimo
The Seven-year Outcome of an Early Orthodontic Treatment Strategy
Journal of Dental Research, June 1, 2008; 87(6): 584 - 588.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.